The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Artists: Labels need YOU --- NOT the other way around Modular Synthesizers
Old 21st April 2010
  #241
Lives for gear
 
petermichael's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nolet View Post
Remember, Britney Spears has been musically active longer than The Beatles at this moment...heh
What the hell does it matter how long Britney Spears has been sexually active?!
Old 21st April 2010
  #242
Lives for gear
 
ianbryn11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nolet View Post
Remember, Britney Spears has been musically active longer than The Beatles at this moment...heh
She may have had an ok run, and im no predicter of the future, but i see her career fading away rather quickly....

Where as artists like The Rolling Stones are still touring and selling out MSG...

I personally am friends with many Indie and Punk bands who tour this country and others.. Europe, Asia, Canada, wherever they want to go.. They book the shows themselves, they pay for the trip with the money they make off of merch sales, and they have a good time rocking shows with 50 or less people in a basement of some grungy punk house...

And all i can say is that most of the music they play is IMHO BETTER than most of what is heard on the radio today.. More heart fealt, more passionate, more REAL...

It is posible to get by and support your band in a DIY fassion.. They may not be making the big bucks, but they are at least putting in the effort, which is what i personally would want to see if i where going to put a band out on my label.
Old 21st April 2010
  #243
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by petermichael View Post
Narcoman and I are in complete agreement here.

I would say the market is ripe for some good filtering services and some reputable gem finders.
heh.... I knew it had to happen one day!! But yeah - the problem is those for who the ONLY goal is money.
Old 21st April 2010
  #244
Lives for gear
 
Nolet's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by petermichael View Post
What the hell does it matter how long Britney Spears has been sexually active?!
You'd be amazed...but there are tons of magazines that focus on especially that kinda stuff! No really!! heh


Kidding aside....I think longevity is slightly overrated. The Rolling Stones is just a freaking joke. Don't want to beat a dead horse, but the 10 years or so of Beatles was just enough. Stop at your highest mark. This means Britney should've quite 2 years ago....
Old 21st April 2010
  #245
Lives for gear
 
ianbryn11's Avatar
 

yea, the Stones where just the first band that came to mind. There is something to be said for going out on top... But, theres another thing to be said for wanting to keep rocking and keeping your fans happy.

I was never a huge Stones fan, but my parents went to see them at MSG a few year ago, and they loved the show...

I would be willing to bet my life savings..(not a substantial amount of money mind you...), that Britney will not have that type of draw 20 years from now... And im sure most of you agree with that....
Old 21st April 2010
  #246
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianbryn11 View Post
yea, the Stones where just the first band that came to mind. There is something to be said for going out on top... But, theres another thing to be said for wanting to keep rocking and keeping your fans happy.

I was never a huge Stones fan, but my parents went to see them at MSG a few year ago, and they loved the show...

I would be willing to bet my life savings..(not a substantial amount of money mind you...), that Britney will not have that type of draw 20 years from now... And im sure most of you agree with that....
maybe... Britney is an "entertainer"... people said the same thing about Madonna in the 80s... Bieber, Jonas Brothers, Miley Cyrus however...

will people care about the next lady ga ga record if she doesn't pull a britney with some kind of larger than life tabloid episode... who knows...

it's almost like for artist to have careers nowadays they need to behave badly and get lots of tabloid attention or everyone forgets (and maybe for good reason), but... just sayin...
Old 21st April 2010
  #247
Lives for gear
 
7161's Avatar
 

Britney Spears mimes 'live' - end of story.


next.
Old 21st April 2010
  #248
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Music can only be "about the music" when the listener is supporting the artist directly.

The only reason it isn't today has been the insertion of advertisers in the middle paying the bills and deciding what music and artists they think the people who they want to reach will find attractive.
Old 21st April 2010
  #249
Gear Maniac
 
Audio Enginerd's Avatar
 

I haven't read this whole thread, but I thought it sounded like a fitting place to post something I heard coming from the president of one of the largest record labels. A band that I recorded, produced, mixed and mastered is in deal negotiations and passed this down from the label head: He said that "we don't want a band/artist until they don't need us anymore." I'm sure many are aware that this is their mentality, but for those that aren't aware, it's a good idea to let that fully sink in. It is a simple statement, but very important to grasp if your goal is to get some label attention.
Old 21st April 2010
  #250
Lives for gear
 
petermichael's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
Music can only be "about the music" when the listener is supporting the artist directly.

The only reason it isn't today has been the insertion of advertisers in the middle paying the bills and deciding what music and artists they think the people who they want to reach will find attractive.
i have to ask, as i haven't seen it yet, and because bob is right here.

every other media has a stream 4 free and a stream 4 pay, with obvious benefits and features going to the stream 4 pay.

is there a profiting stream 4 play with music?

movies - netflix/ on demand
news - pay versions via login

has someone done this with music and eliminated the adds?

everyone knows everything computer based has a advert based version
everyone knows this version is lesser

i would suggest 2 things need to happen.
1. it would need to demonstrate a viable advantage over the existing freebies.
2. it would have to be at least as lucrative for the artists as the existing freebies.

that would be the solution to what bob is talking about.

UNLESS! we go back to the music quality argument again. advertisers left to run amok on their own, yes, will go right to the pretty faces and cheesy existing crap. but advertisers can easily be led by the nose when existing traffic stats show any page, person, band, or link that has a successful draw. and this would take me back to my belief that the solution holds a balanced revenue stream of sales and advertisement dollars for the artist being the way to make an acceptable buck.
Old 21st April 2010
  #251
Lives for gear
 
petermichael's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio Enginerd View Post
I haven't read this whole thread, but I thought it sounded like a fitting place to post something I heard coming from the president of one of the largest record labels. A band that I recorded, produced, mixed and mastered is in deal negotiations and passed this down from the label head: He said that "we don't want a band/artist until they don't need us anymore." I'm sure many are aware that this is their mentality, but for those that aren't aware, it's a good idea to let that fully sink in. It is a simple statement, but very important to grasp if your goal is to get some label attention.
that's a clever way for him to put it.

if that doesn't clearly reinforce the importance of not necessarily diy, but just getting as much done on your own behalf, then i don't know what will.

just like the old slope of applying for a job, for which you have no experience, yet.

thanks for that quote.
Old 21st April 2010
  #252
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio Enginerd View Post
... He said that "we don't want a band/artist until they don't need us anymore." ...
I don't think any of us who have worked for a successful label would disagree with this.

Like I said above every artist is selling access to their audience. No label can get an artist an audience. Money can help an artist reach more listeners but the artist needs to know exactly where it should be spent.

Andrew Loog Oldham told me in 1971 "if the labels aren't coming to you, you haven't done your homework." I've seen nothing that suggests this is not the case. I have seen a few rip-off artists sign a band to a friend of theirs at a label, split the advance with them and then bury the band. The only bands I've ever seen make any money were the ones who the labels went to.
Old 21st April 2010
  #253
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio Enginerd View Post
I haven't read this whole thread, but I thought it sounded like a fitting place to post something I heard coming from the president of one of the largest record labels. A band that I recorded, produced, mixed and mastered is in deal negotiations and passed this down from the label head: He said that "we don't want a band/artist until they don't need us anymore." I'm sure many are aware that this is their mentality, but for those that aren't aware, it's a good idea to let that fully sink in. It is a simple statement, but very important to grasp if your goal is to get some label attention.
yup - and it's been that for my career for nearly 25 years.
Old 22nd April 2010
  #254
Gear Maniac
 

But didn't Andrew Loog Oldham have to shop the 'Stones around? Didn't Brian Epstein shop around the Beatles only to be rejected by everyone but Parlaphone? Labels weren't courting either of those groups...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
I don't think any of us who have worked for a successful label would disagree with this.

Like I said above every artist is selling access to their audience. No label can get an artist an audience. Money can help an artist reach more listeners but the artist needs to know exactly where it should be spent.

Andrew Loog Oldham told me in 1971 "if the labels aren't coming to you, you haven't done your homework." I've seen nothing that suggests this is not the case. I have seen a few rip-off artists sign a band to a friend of theirs at a label, split the advance with them and then bury the band. The only bands I've ever seen make any money were the ones who the labels went to.
Old 22nd April 2010
  #255
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by minipoodle View Post
But didn't Andrew Loog Oldham have to shop the 'Stones around?...
He gave me the impression they had a number of people interested and remember that he is a master publicist.
Old 23rd April 2010
  #256
Gear Maniac
 

So are you saying that Oldam might have made up a story about having to shop the 'Stones around, when in fact they were actively being courted by labels to paint them as an underdog?

My group and I just recently got a manager and they are already proving helpful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
He gave me the impression they had a number of people interested and remember that he is a master publicist.
Old 23rd April 2010
  #257
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

The Stones were a known commodity. His publicity skills undoubtedly made them a much better known commodity. The point is that the artist brings the fans to the table, not the record label.

The Beatles were a complete wild-card that one shouldn't judge anything by. They made an end-run around the whole industry apparently quite by accident out of Brian Epstein's ignorance. I have no doubt that there are other end-runs available today but there is an immense luck factor of having the right ducks lined up in a row that you can't really orchestrate.
Old 10th February 2011
  #258
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Albini View Post
Canada does something similar with its Canadian Content rules for the CBC...
AFAIK, the Canadian Content rules apply not only to the government-funded CBC but to all radio stations, even commercial ones. I believe all radio stations in Canada are required to play a minimum of 30% Canadian content.

I don't know if it's still on the air, but for decades the CBC had a radio show called Brave New Waves that was broadcast nationwide 5 days a week for 6 hours a day that played mostly independent music.
Old 11th February 2011
  #259
Here for the gear
 

So, what happens when a band can't pay back its advance? Do its members have to declare bankruptcy? Are their homes repossessed?

A couple of posters in this thread have stated that nothing happens and that the debt is just forgotten, while Mr. Albini's article suggests otherwise, but doesn't spell it out.

You hear a lot about the minority of major label success stories but one never really hears about what happens to the bands that don't make it.
Old 11th February 2011
  #260
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Igor_A View Post
So, what happens when a band can't pay back its advance? Do its members have to declare bankruptcy? Are their homes repossessed?...
They not only don't have to pay it back, in many deals the label gives them the masters if the album wound up never being released after a single or two fails to attain significant airplay.

Most of the horror stories involve the band's own lawyer and manager hustling big big bucks from a label.
Old 11th February 2011
  #261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Igor_A View Post

You hear a lot about the minority of major label success stories but one never really hears about what happens to the bands that don't make it.
I say it's actually the opposite.
You don't hear much about the majority band/label success stories (no news in that), and hear a lot about the minority of failures.
Old 12th February 2011
  #262
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Igor_A View Post
So, what happens when a band can't pay back its advance? Do its members have to declare bankruptcy? Are their homes repossessed?

A couple of posters in this thread have stated that nothing happens and that the debt is just forgotten, while Mr. Albini's article suggests otherwise, but doesn't spell it out.

You hear a lot about the minority of major label success stories but one never really hears about what happens to the bands that don't make it.
Mr Albini is a god in recording. He's made some of my favorite records. I love his attitude to production (both artistically and business-wise). I really liked a transcribe of his recent talk in Leeds. But he has very little correct info to offer on how the biz actually works. I would take well over half in "that article" with a pinch of salt.

Once you're out of a deal - you're out of that debt and it has nothing to do with personal earning ONLY band/act/artist recoup earnings.
Old 17th February 2011
  #263
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I say it's actually the opposite.
You don't hear much about the majority band/label success stories (no news in that), and hear a lot about the minority of failures.
If that was true, it wouldn't be the dream of every teenage boy in a band to be signed to a major, and one wouldn't have to read obscure rags like Maximum Rock'n'Roll to hear what Albini has to say.

I honestly can't think of a single failure that's been widely publicized. You just don't hear about the failures -- because, they're, well, failures. Every band that signs to a major thinks it's going to be the next U2, Nirvana, or AC/DC.

If you can think of failures that have been talked about enough in the mainstream media to be known by the average musician, I'd love to hear their names.
Old 17th February 2011
  #264
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson View Post
They not only don't have to pay it back, in many deals the label gives them the masters if the album wound up never being released after a single or two fails to attain significant airplay.
Any specific examples?
Old 17th February 2011
  #265
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Igor_A View Post
Any specific examples?
That happened with Wilco, if I'm not mistaken. Their 4th album was recorded and in the can when the label decided to drop them (basically because they weren't interested in even attempting to write a radio single.) It's my understanding that they were able to take those masters and sell them to Nonesuch Records, who then released the album (which became their biggest selling record to date).
Old 17th February 2011
  #266
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by narcoman View Post
Once you're out of a deal - you're out of that debt and it has nothing to do with personal earning ONLY band/act/artist recoup earnings.
It occurred to me while reading Albini's article that even if every word he wrote in it was incontrovertibly correct and every band was forced to read it before considering a major label deal, most rock bands would still sign with a major.

To most of the guys in rock bands, sitting on a tour bus is vastly preferable to working at a corner store. If all you care about in life is drugs, pussy, and seeing your face on the cover of magazines -- which, in my experience, are the overwhelming reasons most guys want to be in bands -- and your alternative is working at some dead-end job, then it should be no surprise that you'd be lining up to swim through sewers to sign that piece of paper.

If it's true that in practice bands don't have to pay back the advance, then that's icing on the cake. Most guys under 30 won't give a rat's ass if the music industry is exploiting them as long as they're getting enough money to keep their noses powdered and enough publicity to keep the groupies coming backstage. Sad but true.

But all this is of historical interest only, since as was already mentioned, the mainstream music industry is kicking the bucket. You know it's in trouble when it starts repressing vinyl.
Old 17th February 2011
  #267
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drpeacock View Post
It's my understanding that they were able to take those masters and sell them to Nonesuch Records, who then released the album (which became their biggest selling record to date).
Did their previous label get a percentage of the sales of those masters? Did it get points?
Old 17th February 2011
  #268
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Igor_A View Post
Any specific examples?
None that I'm at liberty to talk about especially in a public forum.

The many artists who have had great deals aren't whining about it to the press while those who actually got screwed or are looking for something to blame their failure on will often make a lot of noise.

My personal experience has been that at least ten artists have really screwed over labels financially for every one that actually got screwed over by a label. Most of those, if you check out the back story, actually got screwed by their own manager and lawyer who sold them out for the largest possible advance by telling them "the only money you'll ever see is your advance." That will always create a self-fulfilling prophecy unless the artist becomes a superstar. Meanwhile the manager and lawyer are walking off with as much as half of the advance, touring money and recording budget.

The Albini rant sounds very much like one of those cases. Hopefully it isn't one where the lawyer and manager hadn't actually bribed somebody at the label with a piece of the advance resulting in the artist immediately being buried to conceal the crime.

The words "standard recording contract" are a red flag for foul play because there has never been such a thing.
Old 19th February 2011
  #269
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steffmo View Post
No, its not dated, and yes major label does sound old. I agree.

But we are an industry that survives on the excitement of the next big thing. Has there been a "next big thing" in the "screw the labels" era. Someone who has busted it open without an established label?
No, and that's one of the reasons why music is devaluing as well. When you have to force yourself to go back in history just to set yourself apart from the rest who can edit one vocal track a gazillion times and convert it into 128 bands of sine waves that are then pitched, glitched, truncated, and blah blah blah....

The next big thing.... It's probably a holographic singer, straight out of William Gibson's "Idoru" or a music box that generates listenable music and subject matter for lyrics without the musicians based on predicting moods with brainwaves or something. :P
Old 19th February 2011
  #270
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by systematika View Post
No, and that's one of the reasons why music is devaluing as well. When you have to force yourself to go back in history just to set yourself apart from the rest who can edit one vocal track a gazillion times and convert it into 128 bands of sine waves that are then pitched, glitched, truncated, and blah blah blah....

The next big thing.... It's probably a holographic singer, straight out of William Gibson's "Idoru" or a music box that generates listenable music and subject matter for lyrics without the musicians based on predicting moods with brainwaves or something. :P
there was a japanese hit record with a "manga" type character and totally synthesised voice.
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
VegasMusicMan / Downloads, the future - Q+A forum with expert guests from CD Baby, Tunecore and Nimbit
16
bschigel / Geekslutz forum
7

Forum Jump
Forum Jump